MIR: should not inline trait method #44383
Conversation
|
Thanks for the pull request, and welcome! The Rust team is excited to review your changes, and you should hear from @pnkfelix (or someone else) soon. If any changes to this PR are deemed necessary, please add them as extra commits. This ensures that the reviewer can see what has changed since they last reviewed the code. Due to the way GitHub handles out-of-date commits, this should also make it reasonably obvious what issues have or haven't been addressed. Large or tricky changes may require several passes of review and changes. Please see the contribution instructions for more information. |
|
Shouldn't this rather be inlining the actual method if it exists? |
|
@oli-obk babysteps =) I encouraged @qmx to first stem the bleeding, then we can repair the functionality. That said, there is some minor refactoring required in order to (nicely, at least) expose and generalize the helper methods that will do the method resolution. (The existing ones are mostly targeted at trans, where everything is monomorphized.) |
|
@bors r+ |
|
📌 Commit 72c92b3 has been approved by |
alexcrichton
added
the
S-waiting-on-bors
src/librustc_mir/transform/inline.rs
Outdated
| bb, | ||
| location: terminator.source_info | ||
| }); | ||
| let should_inline = match self.tcx.opt_associated_item(callee_def_id) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I realize now we could do this instead:
let should_inline = self.tcx.trait_of_item(callee_def_id).is_none();
|
@bors r+ |
|
📌 Commit 10a5b53 has been approved by |
…sakis MIR: should not inline trait method Fixes #40473. The idea here is bailing out of inlining if we're talking about a trait method.
|
☀️ Test successful - status-appveyor, status-travis |
Fixes #40473.
The idea here is bailing out of inlining if we're talking about a trait method.